The Greens - the no credibility party?

[mantra]

Sounds tough but that is the reality. many don't want to take responsibility and expect things to be a right that government/society must pay for.

What about those that work hard, save, make sacrifices when they are young, limit the number of children they have based on affordability. All they get is more bloody taxes to pay for those that failed to plan and have made choices without being able to sustain them.

The only people that should be helped are those truly in need due to no fault of their own. Mentally ill, handicapped, disabled or those with real hard luck stories.

I agree with you and it sounds good in theory, but it's not just the poor who want something from the government. The wealthy want their share too and in many cases pay little or no tax - leaving that to the lower and middle income earners. While this government hums and haa's about increasing the GST and cutting back on national wage increases, the wealthiest corporations, rich individuals and multinationals have their tax havens and trusts and escape the burden placed on us plebs. If the average Aussie wasn't taxed into poverty perhaps the standard of living would improve where most people wouldn't want or need government assistance.

I don't think families on middle or low incomes are worse off if they're careful. They receive very generous family payments for their children and don't pay much tax. This was a Coalition initiative. It's the single people who carry most of the burden in Australia.

[IQS.RLOW]

The wealthy want their share too and in many cases pay little or no tax - leaving that to the lower and middle income earners.

You really should educate yourself more. The wealthy pay the majority of tax in this country while the poor and middle classes pay little to no tax and in many cases get back far more in handouts that they ever pay.

Are all Green voters this ignorant?

[Rorschach]

By definition I would expect 50% to be just on or below the average wage if you consider what average is. High earners would push the average higher.

I accept living in today's society has costs.

My point is... whatever happened to living within your means.

Did you not learn the difference between modal, mean and median at school?

[Rorschach]

For SN...

http://mattcowgill.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... ns-income/

[Rorschach]

I don't think families on middle or low incomes are worse off if they're careful. They receive very generous family payments for their children and don't pay much tax. This was a Coalition initiative. It's the single people who carry most of the burden in Australia.

Where as you say... single people get no such things.
In many cases it is...
Double Income No Kids vs Single Income No Kids
which kinda spells it out.

[Super Nova]

By definition I would expect 50% to be just on or below the average wage if you consider what average is. High earners would push the average higher.

I accept living in today's society has costs.

My point is... whatever happened to living within your means.

Did you not learn the difference between modal, mean and median at school?

I didn't introduce the word "average".

[Rorschach]

By definition I would expect 50% to be just on or below the average wage if you consider what average is. High earners would push the average higher.

I accept living in today's society has costs.

My point is... whatever happened to living within your means.

Did you not learn the difference between modal, mean and median at school?

I didn't introduce the word "average".

Really? You used it a lot.
If you don't want it addressed then why use it or was I seeing things?
Did you read the information on the link?

[Super Nova]

Really? You used it a lot.
If you don't want it addressed then why use it or was I seeing things?
Did you read the information on the link?

yes and this is more meaningful

So, what is the median equivalised disposable income of Australian households?

The median equivalised disposable household income for Australia in 2007-08 was $36 082 according to the ABS, and $35 664 according the Melbourne Institute’s HILDA survey.

This means a single person, living alone, would need around $36 000 in disposable income to sustain the typical Australian’s standard of living. Following a widely-accepted methodology, each additional adult adds $18 000 to this figure, so a childless couple would need a disposable income of $54 000 a year to enjoy a median standard of living. Each child adds $10 800 to this figure.

A couple family with two children would therefore have needed $75 600 disposable income in 2007-08 to have the same standard of living as the typical Australian. The family in The Australian’s story has a gross income well over double this amount, and disposable income that is still more than double the median. They are far from typical.

I know things have gone up in aus so is 50K much money now. I guess it is SFA.

[Rorschach]

What would be even more meaningful for politicians and the media to use would be tha MODAL wage, which is the wage that most Australians are paid... but no one ever uses it.

Mean/average.
Median/middle.
Modal/most.

It would however be much closer to the $35,000.

But it is good to see you got around to reading the link.

[Neferti]

Is $35,000 net or gross?